Mikael Hambardzumyan on Suren Papikyan's Appointment as Minister: "Haykar"

“Haykar” reports: We asked Mikael Hambardzumyan, the former acting director of the National Security Service (NSS), how he interprets the recent change in the Ministry of Defense, when Arshak Karapetyan was dismissed and Suren Papikyan was appointed in his place. What impact could it have on Armenia's security system?

“This is an unprecedented disgraceful situation. The former Minister of Defense David Tonoyan and Deputy Chief of the General Staff Stepan Galstyan are in custody, charges have been brought against Chief of Staff Artak Davtyan, Vagharshak Harutyunyan and Arshak Karapetyan have been dismissed, and criminal proceedings are underway against numerous senior officers. The moral and psychological atmosphere in the army, the lack of combat spirit, is very concerning; all of this poses a direct threat to our country and state. We are going to lose Artsakh, our territories in Armenia, we are being discredited, becoming agents of foreign powers. Appointing a civilian like Suren Papikyan as minister during this complex and responsible military time cannot be justified; he cannot improve the army's combat readiness or spirit in such a short time, nor can he adequately organize the defense of our territories claimed by the adversary,” Mr. Hambardzumyan said.

According to him, the most that Papikyan can do is to ensure the withdrawal of Armenian troops from the areas desired by the adversary without incident and loss. This is not due to Papikyan's personal qualities, but rather because to achieve at least somewhat positive results in the current situation, there must be an authoritative commander of the army, professional experience, political will, serious human and material resources, and, most importantly, a united and cohesive atmosphere within the country, which is completely absent.

Hambardzumyan, who was temporarily appointed as NSS director and dismissed a short time later during Pashinyan's administration, also reminds that frequent changes of leaders in security agencies cannot lead to good outcomes, and this is yet another testimony to the poor and ineffective governance of the country.

He then spoke positively about the already dismissed Arshak Karapetyan: “During the war and prior, I had two or three opportunities to personally interact with Arshak Karapetyan; he left the impression of a diligent, knowledgeable soldier with his distinct identity and dignity. I believe there were deep reasons behind Karapetyan’s resignation that were incompatible and intolerable for his military character,” he said and continued: “Unfortunately, I am increasingly convinced that all territories claimed by the adversary will be surrendered to them. I regret that this ‘historical’ mission was entrusted to Papikyan, a historian by profession, who possesses positive human traits. Perhaps he will manage to convince the public and guarantee that these painful and illegal concessions to the Azerbaijani-Turkish side will truly lead to the ‘peaceful era’ so desired by the authorities, in which I myself do not believe.”

In conclusion, Mikael Hambardzumyan added: “It is a known truth that attention is paid to well-organized, developed, strong, reliable allies and countries with a value system of democratic governance, whereas a weak and fragmented country is conquered through military action or soft power, which is more characteristic of our region.”